Deepak @ Raj v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court of Delhi declined bail in an FIR under Sections 302 and 34 IPC, noting adverse FSL reports and the prosecution stage, directing trial completion within one year and disposing the application.
What did the court decide?
Bail denied; trial concluded within one year; application disposed.
What the court decided
$~16.
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- BAIL APPLN. 1449/2016 DEEPAK @ RAJ
..... Petitioner
Through: versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for the State.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
O R D E R % 08.02.2017
Reply has been tendered by Ms. Kolluru, which is taken on record. Along with the reply, the report received from FSL dated 20.12.2016 and 19.12.2016 have been placed on record. The said FSL reports are against the petitioner. The petitioner is undergoing trial in case FIR No.292/2013 under Section 302/ 34 IPC.
In view of the aforesaid development, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
The prosecution is leading its evidence. Let the remaining evidence be recorded in the case without any delay. Neither party shall seek nor be granted any undue adjournment. It is hoped that the Trial Court shall render
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of adverse FSL reports while the prosecution is leading evidence.
Whether the trial should conclude within the next one year.
How to dispose of the bail application given the current stage of the trial.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
DEEPAK @ RAJ
- respondent
STATE
Coram
VIPIN SANGHI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court